U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

An analysis of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York's patent litigation practice reveals a district with a moderately active docket that operates under a structured, but not accelerated, procedural framework. While not one of the nation's top patent venues by case volume, the court handles a variety of patent disputes, overseen by a bench that includes several judges with experience in the field.

Court Overview

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.) is a federal court in the Second Circuit with courthouses in Brooklyn and Central Islip. Its jurisdiction covers the New York City boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island, along with Nassau and Suffolk counties on Long Island. While national patent litigation is often concentrated in districts such as the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas and the District of Delaware, the E.D.N.Y. maintains a consistent, though not voluminous, patent docket. Detailed statistics ranking the E.D.N.Y.'s patent caseload against all other districts are not readily available in public reports, but it is not considered one of the top five busiest venues for patent filings.

Patent Docket Reputation

The Eastern District of New York is not known as a "rocket docket" and does not have a reputation for unusually rapid times to trial in patent cases. The pace of litigation is more measured compared to districts known for their speed. There is no strong, data-supported reputation for being either plaintiff- or defendant-friendly. Rulings on procedural matters like transfer motions are fact-specific. For instance, Judge Joan M. Azrack has granted motions to transfer for improper venue when a defendant's connection to the district is not adequately established. The court also considers the impact of parallel proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with judges granting stays of litigation pending the outcome of inter partes reviews to conserve judicial resources.

Local Rules and Procedures

Patent litigation in the E.D.N.Y. is governed by a set of Local Patent Rules that are administered jointly with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. These rules are designed to streamline litigation by establishing a clear schedule for key events. They mandate early disclosure of infringement and invalidity contentions. For example, a party claiming infringement must serve its "Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions" within 45 days of the initial scheduling conference. The opposing party must then serve its "Invalidity Contentions" within 45 days of receiving the infringement contentions. The rules also set forth a structured process for claim construction, requiring the parties to jointly file a chart of disputed terms and a schedule for briefing.

Notable Cases and Judges

While the provided list of tracked cases, including AlmondNet, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc. and Almondnet, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, dates back to 2016, the court continues to handle notable patent matters. A more recent significant case is Touchstream Technologies, Inc. v. Altice USA, Inc., a patent infringement suit involving content display technology that was transferred from the Eastern District of Texas to the E.D.N.Y. in March 2024.

Several judges on the E.D.N.Y. bench have presided over patent cases and developed experience in the area. These include:

• Pamela K. Chen, who has ruled on issues such as summary judgment of non-obviousness and has found a case "exceptional" to award attorney's fees based on "borderline frivolous" arguments.
• Brian M. Cogan, who has handled transfer motions in patent disputes.
• Joan M. Azrack, whose rulings address venue and stays pending PTAB review.
• Eric R. Komitee, Nusrat J. Choudhury, and Sanket J. Bulsara are also noted for their involvement in recent patent infringement cases, ruling on motions to dismiss and other substantive matters.